|
In early May 2009, I had the privilege to visit the Me 262
Project just north of Seattle, in Everett, WA. I had been following
the progress of this interesting group through the newsletters
of the Spirit of Flight
Center near Denver CO. In fact, one
recent newsletter highlighted the recent roll-out of Me 262A-1c
Yellow 5 and I just had to go see this for myself.
There are a number of articles in the various aviation journals
about the Me 262 Project and rather than repeat a lot of good
work, I’ll list a few of the better ones at the end of
the article. The ‘Readers Digest Abridged’ version
of this story is simple: some aviation entrepreneurs in Texas
came together in the early 1990s to build new-production Me
262s based upon an airframe that was one of several captured
and brought over to the United States for evaluation. This
particular airframe, nicknamed ‘Vera’ was
to be restored to like-new condition in exchange for using
the aircraft as the basis for the new-construction Me 262s.
The company was called Classic Fighter Industries, Inc. (CFII)
and in 1993, the Stormbird Project was officially launched.
The concept was simple and achievable – build five
flying aircraft using the same techniques and materials employed
by Messerschmitt, with only a few modern concessions for safety,
but more on that later. The project ran into problems and CFII
became bogged down in lawsuits. In 1998, the project and its
assets were moved up to Everett and the Me 262 Project
picked up where CFII left off.
Nearly 10 years after the start of the Stormbird Project,
Flight Article number 1 (FA1) took to the air in 1992. This
YouTube
video captures the first flights of FA1 and FA2. FA1
is a two-seat Me 262B-1c and FA2 is the single-seat Me 262A-1c.
The Messerschmitt Foundation of Munich Germany (who purchased
FA2) allocated the c-suffix to these new-build aircraft. The
staff of the Me 262 Project is naturally quite proud of their
achievements. These flight articles are built as closely to
the original specifications and techniques as possible. One
of the first considerations however was the engine.
The Jumo 004 turbojet engine would operate around 10 hours
before failure, often times less, while producing a modest
2,000 pounds of thrust. A more reliable and far easier engine
to acquire and maintain is the General Electric J85. This engine
has been around for many years in military aircraft and is
also available as a commercial engine as the CJ610. In its
non-afterburning configuration, the J85 produces around 2,500
pounds of thrust. While the J85 sounds like a comparatively
simple choice to replace the Jumo, it also posed a significant
problem.
Each Jumo 004 weighs over 1,500 pounds and is mounted ahead
of the airframe’s center of gravity. The J85 weighs around
400 pounds, and if it was mounted in the same position on the
wing, the aircraft would be around 2,200 pounds lighter but
that would shift the center of gravity too far aft (too tail
heavy) for safe flight. After some innovative engineering,
the solution was brilliantly simple – use the engine
casting for the Jumo 004, but alter the interior of the casting
to accommodate the J85. In short, the J85 was mounted inside
the shell of the Jumo engine and thus the weight and balance
problems went away and the new engines would not alter the
profile of the engine nacelles.
Not everything went so smoothly. While many of the components
of the aircraft were reverse-engineered and custom-built, a
few glitches naturally crept into the works. After the successful
first flight of FA1 (Me 262B-1c), the second test flight was
also the first attempt to raise and lower the landing gear.
While the landing gear cycled perfectly while the aircraft
was in the hangar on the jacks, in flight was a different story.
After several unsuccessful attempts to get the gear back down,
the test pilot used the emergency blow-down system to get the
gear down and locked, or so they hoped. Unfortunately the port
main landing gear collapsed on landing and laid up the aircraft
for over a year to repair the wing and to re-engineer the landing
gear actuator that had failed.
Fortunately, the mishap with FA1 was overcome; the aircraft
flew again in 2004 and was delivered to its new owner. FA2
(Me 262A-1c) flew for the first time a year later and after
completing its test flights, was flown over to Germany in a
chartered An-124. The aircraft has since been a big hit on
the European airshow circuit.
Check
out this Google Video of FA2 in action. There are some interesting differences
between FA1 and FA2 besides the obvious number of seats.
FA1 is a flying reproduction built as close to the original
Me 262 design as possible. As a result, it weighs in at over
14,000 pounds. FA2 had to be redesigned (no armor plate, etc.)
to keep the aircraft under the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) standards weight threshold of 12,500 pounds.
Like the Federal Aviation Administration, the ICAO has a weight
threshold of 12,500 pounds – aircraft below this weight
have simpler regulations for aircraft and pilot certification.
In addition, ICAO regulations preclude the use of military
surplus engines without logbooks, so the J85s used in FA1 were
replaced with CJ610s in FA2. You’ll also note that FA2
is nearly devoid of any markings. Not only are swastikas illegal
in Germany (and other parts of Europe), but even the Reichs
Defense Bands were kept off the aircraft to avoid problems.
After FA1 was delivered to its owner, the aircraft was stored
in a hangar as it was stuck in limbo between the additional
avionics that its owner wanted and the certification process
that such modifications would have required. The good news
is that the Collings Foundation has taken over operations of
the FA1 and are even offering
flights (with an appropriate donation) and we may see FA1
at selected airshows in the future.
In the meantime, the Me 262 Project team recently completed
Yellow 5, which replicates the colors of the aircraft from
3./JG 7 as flown by Anton Schlopper. This is a non-flying reproduction
intended to be a museum display, and while Yellow 5 is built
to the same standards as its flying counterparts, it lacks
the engines to fly. If you look at the photo walk around of
this aircraft, you’ll note that the staff has added a
feature not available on any other Me 262s on display anywhere – rockets.
Prior to this example, only the Smithsonian Institution’s
Me 262 retained its wooden 12-shot rocket launchers. This reproduction
not only has the launchers, but also 24 inert replica R4M rockets
as well.
In the other hangar, FA3 is under construction and is reportedly
one of the airframes designed to be convertible between a single-seat
Me 262A-1c and a two-seat Me 262B-1c. Like Yellow 5, FA3 is
looking for a customer and the current economic situation hasn’t
helped, but work progresses and we’ll look forward to
seeing FA3 in its first flight in the future.
Further Reading/Viewing:
Return to the Me 262 Main Menu
HOME
WHAT'S NEW
REVIEWS
AIRCRAFT
ARMOR
NAVAL
SPACE
HISTORY
MUSEUM
CALENDAR
COLOR REFS
WRITERS GUIDE
TIPS
FUTURE KITS
ABOUT
READERS GALLERY
LOGOS
SOLAR MONITOR
FAQS
SPECIAL
STAFF
CONTACT
|